John and James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1882

35 ordered to rep lace an absentee instead o f um p ir ing , sa y , “ S ir, b e l ie v e me, I Ind almost as soon take otf mv coa t and fight, fo r th e k n o ck s and b low s I innv'trct.” I have known a ba l l from W a l t e r M ynn g o fr om the p itch at one bound clean into the lo n g -s t o p ’s hand s ; yes , and I saw o ld JJ e a c j l e y , the resu tried in those days. , , It was, when in 1830 tlie famous North and South elevens, scoring about a hundred an innings at L i OR d ’ s , p layed tlie re tu rn at L e ic e s te r , the per fect state o f w h ich ground I saw shortly a fter . It was th e re tha t W alter M ynn m ade his fam ous in n in g s ,and R eduate , w h o s e b ow l in g had d e fied all play on the hard and rough ground at L ord s , w h ich was then lik e baked c lay , said his how ling rose so true that h ow l what leng th he w ou ld M ynn wou ld make guess hits, sw ip in g b e fo r e the hall rose, and d r iv in g his best ba lls all over the ground . I saw then how true g round , true lik e a m od e rn ground, produ ced a m odern score , about /5 0 runs to the m a tch . Xu this match W illiam C lark p layed , but was never asked to take the ba ll, h is pow er o f bow ling be ing then unknown . M ynn never cou ld p la y C l a r k , and doubtless his score , had C lark been put on , w ou ld have been , as it a lw ays was when opposed to C lark , small indeed . So fur do smooth grounds account for long scores. No doubt in primitive times, when the sheep had been driven away, and their droppings swept up, the ground was deemed ready for the stumps. The great fault of grounds in these days is, that there is nothing deserving of the name of turf—no fine network of undergrass to assist the spin of the delivery. I am far from saying that batting has not improved with amateurs, though with professionals it has fallen off, and I shall be much surprised if the eleven now on their way to Australia do not prove too weak in scoring to do themselves much credit. During the years that the Players usually heat the Gentlemen, they beat them in batting as well as howling—add to this, in the days of a lower delivery “ hand under shoulder ” shooting balls, now so rare, were common enough, and I have not forgotten the remark of G rund y , whom I met fresh from Oxford one day, when the Oxford Eleven were to play Marylebone—“ they can play anything but shooting bowling. They arc line batters, but shooters find them out.” This particular kind of defence was their weak point; and now from the style of play which 1 commonly see, I think that bowlers like W ootton and G rundy , to say nothing o f Con butt , R edoate , and I I il l y e r , would soon drive our present hitters back to a more cautious style o f play. Thev could learn to adapt their play perhaps, but believe me, they would have a lesson to learn. The only balls I ever feared were shooters—perhaps mv height gave me an advantage with those that rose high. But now a little about the old players, before the round-arm delivery was introduced. Underhand howling is now spoken of as Slows, but my young friends will be surprised to hear that the fastest I ever remember wrere underhand T-u-st, wc had O siialokston , “ the Squire,” whose bowline: was so difficult o lut before wicket that his boasted single-wicket matches became a nuisance at L oro s. Mr. AV a r d told me that it Mas lie who iirst found out